Reminds me of this:

I think atproto is a good protocol, but god bluesky-the-company is dogshit.

  • irelephant [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Their argument is something like this:

    People might say something like “ai is incapable of thinking” or “ai is stupid”, but if you replace the word “ai” with something like “women”, you’re saying something unacceptable.

    • shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      So they’re attributing personhood to AI.

      Before it has come anywhere close to meaningfully mimicking conciousness.

      Are they stupid?

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yeah that was my biggest takeaway is these posts seem to assume sentience in what’s little more than a sophisticated “most likely next word” generator. There’s tons of cool things that can be done with these new machine learning tools, but they are not sentient, they are not close to sentience and we may never invent artificial sentience.

        The one thing we now know for sure is we can damn well convince people of sentience artificially far more easily than I ever suspected